How do you feel about magazines airbrushing babies' photos?

THIS is what gets people enraged about airbrushing?? Really?! Look, babies are no different from adults in this case. Yes, I wholeheartedly agree that airbrushing babies is wrong. But you know what, so is touching up that model with just a lil bit of fat on the sides. And now because of High Definition television, even our favorite shows are getting tarnished with such a ridiculous amount of post-production "make-up". It boggles the mind that any power-that-unfortunately-be looks at the finished product of an airbrushed disaster and says "yes, I like this. This is how people look in real life and this does not look artificial in the slightest!"

This procedure is so completely unnecessary (and quite the turn-off, I might add) that if these people actually need such a device to cover up "flaws" in women, men, babies or even food, maybe they should consider an alternate reality like the boys from Weird Science did.

Leave our skin alone. If it's flawed, even better. At least it's REAL.

This is hilarious! So much fuzz about this!???? I agree if the baby has red eyes, because he/she just got up, it might not be the best time to take a pic,... then again, it's the industry, and time is an issue. If people can't deal with that, well don't buy magazines, none for that matter. Don't go to movies either. Don't even watch news. Nor buy make-up, or ice-cream, with all the testing going on, you never know. Once we are at it, don't smoke, don't drive, don't curse, don't wear leather,.... and so on, and so on. It's a picture, people!

When I read the article's headline, I first taught someone had lippo-sucked the baby's fat rolls on his/her tummy or something like that, for a cover picture. THAT would really have creeped me out! But it turned out to be retouching of a pic, and that's what all the fuzz is about??? Common.

Sounds of 'mass hysteria' to me. We'd better be carefull, next we know we start a war because someone retouched a baby pic on some cover of some baby magazine.

I wasn't sorry to read this article, on the one hand I felt I wasted my time (also giving this reaction) on such a silly issue,... but I got a good laugh out of it. To think people take such issue on such things. Really. Still smiling.... will go on for a while. Thanks for that!

I think it was thoroughly explained that creases and fat rolls are removed, not for "Visual" appeal, but for cover headlines and such. And if you touch up one side then you must even it out on the other, as to not look lopsided.

And babies are not too predictable on their wants and needs, and you will never get the "perfect" picture. So editing out red eyes, and other things take place.

Do we glorify the shape of a woman to the point to where women envy the size "0" models? Yes, but I highly doubt we would do the same to children. If a parent did that, then I hope Child Protective Services would step in, and remove the child from the home. Unlike adult female models who may get let go for getting beyond a size "3" I doubt anyone is advocating putting an average baby on a diet.

Good Grief get a grip.

With all that is going around us in the world today - and all you people have to complain about is something so miniscule like airbrushing a foto - you need to get a life..... or at least a sense of priority.

I agree with Intouch with Reality- more important things in this life to get upset about.

I think that the world had better things to worry about than if a baby magazine airbrushes the cover baby's picture. So what if they did! The mom is obviously trying so hard, and the baby looks happy. I hope this doesn't get the little guy blacklisted. You people who are making an uproar are stupid. Get a life!

Oh jeesh, people, GET OVER YOURSELVES. It's a bloody PHOTOGRAPH on a MAGAZINE COVER. If you bothered to read the article all the way through, there were PRACTICAL reasons for doing so. Some of the dark creases were BARELY modified so as to make the text on the cover legible (you can't read black text against a dark background very well, now can you?). No one is exempt from light airbrushing on magazine covers. The whole purpose of the magazine cover is to look enticing and pretty, so people will buy it. I HIGHLY doubt the magazine company would airbrush for the sole purpose of thinking "this baby is not perfect, we must make it a DESIGNER BABY!!"

If you think this will cause parents to start comparing their babies to other babies as if they were designer bags and feel the need to "perfect them", then you are either incredibly stupid or think our population as a whole is retarded. Sadly, it may be both.

TL;DR - stop getting so hyped up over this, it wasn't some diabolical scheme to make designer-model-perfect babies. Go spend your time obsessing over something more important.

I feel the same way as I do about any airbrushing. I feel it sends the wrong message to our young people that they are not good enough. Removing things ( stuff in the wrong places) is okay, alter the background fine but change the shape, color or looks of the people is wrong whether child or adult. If beauty is only skin deep then why is it so important to the buying public. Would we not all feel more beautiful ourselves if we did not have to try to aspire to this false sense of beauty created by the media?

the big question is why all the people buy into it.   its a cover of a magazine.   not real life.  are people that moldable that they would hurt their child for looks?  if yes.   they are messed up.  no common sense.

Its just a photo to sell the magazine... why does this have to be a serious debate. Just about every picture in these magazines are touched up one way or another, WE LIVE IN A TOUCHED UP SOCIETY. How about debating more important issues like helping each other find work, assisting those that cant put food on their table, how we are going to stop the fools in Washington from bankrupting our country or maybe a debate why Christmas has become a politically correct issue that just sickens those that knows its real purpose. These seem to be more worthy issues than some baby picture being touched up.